Research Report No. 74 July, 1980
Measured Crop Performance
SMALL GRAIN
1980
JOHN C. RICE, Professor
A. R. ADAMS, Research Assistant
E. L. JONES, Agricultural Research Supervisor
G. C. OLIVER, Agricultural Research Assistant
Department of Crop Science NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY
INTRODUCTION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE ••.•••.•.•••.•.•.•.•.•.•.•••••••.• 4
Agencies Sponsoring Entries ••••••••••.•••.•••.•.•.•
4
Tes t Locations •.••.•.•.•••.•••.•.•.•••.•• 4
Cultural Practices •••.•.•.•.•.•••.•.•.•••.•.•.•.•.• 6
Seasonal Conditions
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
8
11
Barley ••••.•.•••.•••••••.•••.•••••••.•••••.•.•.•.•. 11
Oats •.•.•.•.•.•.•.•••.•.•.•.•.•.••..•.•.•••.•.•.•.• 12
Wh.eat •.•••.•.• 12
Lodging .•.• '. • . • . • . • . • . • . • . • . • . • . • • • • • . • • • • • . • . • . • . • 13
TABLES
Characteristics of varieties
14
Barley performance in the Piedmont •.•.•••.•..••.•.• 16
Barley performance in the Coastal Plain .•.•.•.•.•.• 16
Oat performance in the Piedmont •.•••.•••••.•••.•.•• 17
Oat performance in the Coastal Plain ••••••.••.. -. . .. 17
Wh.eat performance in the Piedmont
Wheat performance in the Coastal Plain •.•.•.•.•.••• 18
18
Lodging Data •.•.•.•.•••••.•.•••.•.•.•.•.•.•••••••.• 19
1
1980
PERFORMANCE OF SMALL GRAIN VARIETIES IN NORTH CAROLINA
John C. Rice, E. L. Jones, G. C. Oliver, Ray
Adam~/
INTRODUCTION
The Official Variety Test on Small Grain varieties in North Carolina is
conducted annually by locating evaluation trials throughout the small grain
producing area of the state. These tests are conducted to determine the
value and suitability of commercially available and prospective varieties
of wheat, oats and barley for planting in North Carolina. The results of
these tests are intended to aid the growers and agricultural workers in
the selection of a variety best suited for their particular area of the
state or region.
Winter wheat production in North Carolina during the 1979 season
was 7,600,000 bushels. This was an increase of 27 percent over the 1978
crop. Acreage to be harvested for grain in 1979 was 210,000 acres
compared to 180,000 acres harvested in 1978.
It is estimated that the yield per acre for the 1979 crop was 36
bushels per acre. This would be an increase of three bushels over the
previous year. The 1980 crop was harvested under ideal weather conditions.
The United States winter wheat production in 1979 was 1.61 billion
bushels, up 29 percent from the previous year's production of 1.25 billion
bushels. The yield of 36.9 bushels per acre was a record high yield
exceeding the previous record set in 1971 by 1.5 bushels. Growers
harvested 43.6 million acres for grain, 12 percent more than the previous
year.
Oat production in North Carolina during 1979 totaled 5.3 million
bushels, up 2 percent from the previous year's production of 5.2 million
bushels. The average yield per acre at 56 bushels was up one bushel
from the previous year. Acreage harvested in 1979 totaled 95,000 acres,
identical to the 1978 acreage but 20,000 acres more than in 1977.
The United States production of oats during 1979 totaled 534 million
bushels, do~ 10 percent from the previous year's production of 596 million bushels. This was the lowest production since 1881. Yield per harvested
acre averaged 54.4 bushels compared with 52.2 bushels a year earlier.
The 9.83 million acres harvested for grain was 14 percent below a year
earlier and the smallest acreage harvested since 1869.
During 1979 the barley production in North Carolina totaled 3.1
million bushels, up 3 percent from the previous year's production of 3.0
million bushels. The average yield per acre at 51 bushels was the same
as the previous year but 11 bushels more than in 1977. Acreage harvested
in 1979 totaled 61,000 acres, up 2,000 acres from a year earlier.
United States production of barley during 1979 totaled 378 million
bushels, down 16 percent from the previous year's production of 449 million
bushels. Yield per acre averaged a record high 50.6 bushels, up 2.0
bushels from the previous record high set last year. The 7.47 million
acres harvested for grain was 19 percent below a year earlier and the
smallest acreage harvested since 19340
Information on varietal performance is present from six test locations
3
In comparing the performance of varieties, data from the area which most
nearly represents the grower's conditions should be used. Seasonal
conditions differ from year to year; therefore, a variety which looks
superior for one year may not be consistently good, hence, varieties
should be evaluated on the basis of performance over several years.
Depending upon the release date of the entry, data are presented for
performance from one to five years. All available datal/were used in
determining the pathologic and agronomic characteristics of the varieties.
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
Commercial varieties and experimental lines developed by public and
private agencies are included in these tests. Any individual or firm may
make application for having entries included by writing the Department of
Crop Science, North Carolina State University at Raleigh. A fee is charged
on an entry basis for all private entries. Personnel of the testing program
may include entries about which further information is desired.
Agencies Sponsoring Entries
Coker's Pedigreed Seed Company McNair Seed Company, Inc. North American Plant Breeders
North Carolina Agricultural Expt. Sta. Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc. Purdue University Agricultural Expt. Sta. South Carolina Agricultural Expt. Sta. Virginia Agricultural Expt. Sta.
Hartsville, S. C. Laurinburg, N. C. Brookston, Indiana Raleigh, N. C. Tipton, Indiana Lafayette, Indiana Clemson, S. C. Blacksburg, Virginia
Six locations were used in 1979-80 with three in the Piedmont and three
in the Coastal Plain as shown in Figure 1.
farrn~1
and two were on research stations.Four tests were located on private
A randomized block design with
four replications was used at each locations.1 1
lIthe
cooperative spirit and civic-minded service rendered by the farmerswho provided the land and the necessary cultural practices for these trials and the cooperation of the county agents are gratefully acknowledged.
5
1980
LOCA.TION OF SMALL GRAIN PERFORMANCE TRIALS
• Signifies Official Variety Test Locations
COOPERATORS
PIEDMONT
Rowan County: Mr. Clyde McSwain, Superintendent, Piedmont Research Station, Salisbury, North Carolina
County Extension Chairman, J. Harold Caudill
Stanly County: Mr. Thurman Burleson, Route 1, New London, North Carolina
County Extension Chairman, J. Frank Simpson
Chatham County: A. P. Buckner, Route 2, Pittsboro, North Carolina
County Extension Chairman, John Cooper and Agricultural Extension Agent, Carl Outz
COASTAL PLAIN
Perquimans County: Mr. Albert D. Eure, Route 3, Hertford North Carolina
County Extension Chairman, Richard H. Bryant
Washington County: Mr. John Smith, Superintendent, Tidewater Research Station, Plymouth, North Carolina
County Extension Chairman, Guy M. vfuitford
Wayne County: Mr. Wayland Price, Route 4, Mt. Olive, North Carolina
Cultural Practices
Cultural practices, such as seed bed preparation, date of planting,
fertilization and topdressing were in accord with good farming practices
and were uniform for all entries at a given location, Table 1. Several
months prior to planting each test location, soil s?mples were obtained
for the test field and fertilizer requirements were made in accordance with
the soil analysis report. Lime was applied, if needed, to adjust the pH
to a desirable level for small grain production.
Starting in 1969 all tests were planted with cone-type, tractor-mounted,
spring loaded disc equipment. The disc allowed for more accurate seeding in
areas with stubble or organic matter on the soil surface. The seeding rate
was one gram per foot of row. The rows were changed to seven inch spacing in
1979. Each plot consisted of seven rows fifteen feet long with two feet
between each plot. The dates of planting and fertilization at planting are
shown in Table 1 for each test location.
A Kincaid combine was used for harvesting individual plots. Grain
from individual plots was collected as it came from the elevator and
weighed. The combine was stopped at the end of each plot for a short
interval of time in order for the machine to clean out between plots prior to
weighing the grain from the plot. A sample of grain was taken from two
replications for the determination of test weight and moisture. All plots
were adjusted to 13 percent moisture. All samples were run through a small
thresher to remove the awns and foreign matter prior to taking test weights.
The combine was used to more nearly simulate the conditions u~der which these varieties would be harvested on farms and it appeared to give very
Table 1. Cultural practices for small grain tests - 1980
Area and Fertilizer pH Topdress Date of Date of
Cooperator lbs/A & Grade Results lbs/A planting harvesting
Piedmont Area
Stanly County 6.0 75 lbs. 30% Nit. Sol. October 17 Barley - June 10
Thurman Burleson 15-30-15 Oats - June 10
Wheat - June 10
Rowan County 900 Lbs , 5.9 (included in fert.) October 17 Barley - June 10
Clyde McSwain 10-20-20 Oats - June 10
Wheat - June 10
Chatham County 200 Lbs , 5.5 80 lbs. 34% Amm. Nit. October 23 Barley - June 17
A. P. Buckner 10-10-10 Oats - June 17 "'-J
Wheat - June 17
Coastal Plain Area
Perquimans County 1000 Lbs , 6.0 None October 22 Barley - June 16
Albert D. Eure 10-5-5 Oats - June 16
Wheat - June 16
Wayne County 300 Lbs , 5.5 100 lbs. 30% Nit. Sol. October 16 Barley - June 9
Wayland Price 3-10-30 Oats - June 9
Wheat - June 9
Washington County 250 Lbs , 5.4 70 1bs. 30% Amm. Nit. October 22 Barley - June 16
John Smith 10-20-20 Oats - June 16
Seasonal Conditions
The seasonal conditions during the Fall of 1979 and Spring of 1980
were characterized by variable weather which had an influence on small
grain production. Yields were somewhat normal to subnormal with one
location, Rowan County, having the most ideal growing season.
September 1979: Land preparation for small grain planting was aided
by scattered thundershowers across North Carolina. Soil moisture supplies
varied from adequate to surplus during the middle of the month to open
weather during the latter part of the month. During the last week, the
average number of days suitable for field work was 5.2.
October 1979: October is the month for planting small grain in
North Carolina and weather conditions, although somewhat wet during the
first two weeks, continued to improve and fall harvesting activities
progressed during the latter two weeks. Small grain was seeded on time
in all tests and adequate moisture resulted in excellent stands. Generally
dry, favorable weather prevailed during the latter part of the month.
November 1979: During this month three out of the four weeks had
suitable weather for outside activities. Rains hindered many Tar Heel
farmers from seeding crops during the third week. Most of the month saw
sunny skies and light precipitation. Temperatures averaged 7 to 13 degrees
above normal.
December 1979: In general, temperatures across the Tar Heel State
remained above normal for most of the month. Precipitation generally averaged
below normal with high pressure controlling weather conditions during the
month. Most of the month would be considered "good weather" for outside
9
January 1980: During the early part of the month temperatures averaged
near or slightly below normal. The month was dominated by low pressure
systems, cloudy skies and precipitation. Some of the precipitation was in
the form of freezing rain and sleet. Small grain conditions were listed as
fair to mostly good across the state. There were some reports of poor
stands of wheat in the Piedmont region.
February 1980: The normal cold damage period resulted from usually
low temperatures during this month. Temperatures in February averaged
7 to 11 degrees below normal with precipitation light to moderate. Two
winter storms produced widespread heavy snow over most of the state.
The northeastern sections of the state were hardest hit with up to 18
inches of snow in the Elizabeth City area on February 6. The last week of
the month saw the high pressure moving off the Florida Coast and warm and
moist air entering the region.
March 1980: The first part of the month was spent digging out from
the massive snow storm during the week-end of March land 2. Temperatures
during most of the other weeks averaged near normal in the mountains and
1 to 4 degrees above normal east of the mountains. Rainfall during the
month was heavy in the western and central sections of the state and
moderate to heavy in the east. During the latter part of the month, high
pressure over the state produced fair but cold weather. Rainfall was'
moderate to heavy over most of the state.
April 1980: Most small grains--oats, wheat and barley, showed a
slight improvement during this month and are listed in mostly good condition.
The middle of the month was characterized by being wet and cold in the
Piedmont and Coastal Plain. Rain in the mountain area resulted in some
May 1980: This month was characterized by above normal temperatures
and below normal rainfall. During the latter part of the month, soil
moisture supplies increased substantially. Weather crop respondents
rated 43 percent of moisture in the state surplus, 54 percent adequate
and 2 percent short during the last week. The previous week showed
93 percent of the state with less than adequate moisture supplies.
June 1980: Four weeks of dry weather during May and early June
caused most crops to decline during this period. By the end of the third
week soil moisture had declined drastically across the state with only
8 percent reporting soil moisture as adequate as of June 15. This dry
weather was helpful in combining of small grain and as of June 15 about
35 percent of the wheat had been harvested, 49 percent of the oats and
68 percent of the barley. This was well ahead of both last year's prograss
and the five-year average.
General 1979-1980: This 1979-80 small grain season was characterized
by a normal fall with a cold winter but not too severe for winter damage.
A normal spring resulted in adequate growth and a very dry May and June
were conducive to harvesting a dry crop of small grain. Barley yellow dwarf
was a severe disease in some areas of the Piedmont and especially at the
Stanly County Official Variety Test. This disease resulted in lower yields
11
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The performance of the 1980 tests, along with the previous four years,
is presented by crop and area in a tabular form in this report. Since the
genetic expression of a variety is influenced greatly by the environment,
it is best to have several years' data from which to draw conclusions. For
example, if a variety appeared in the two-year average but not in the three
year average, then it must be compared only within the two-year and not with
the data in the three-year average since it is possible that the third year
could have been extremely good or poor and not comparable.
Barley
Table 5 shows the performance of barley in the Piedmont. Yields were
comparable with last year varying from a high of 79.8 bushels per acre
for the variety Boone to 51.3 bushels for Maury. The mean of the test
for the 1980 season was 69.7 bushels per acre compared with 67.7 bushels
per acre in 1979.
The test weight of 47.0 and 46.9 for the experimental NC 75-75 and
Keowee respectively were the highest test weights in pounds per bushel of
all entries. Boone had the highest five-year average of four entries common
to the test for this period of time with 71.0 bushels per acre and Keowee
continued to have the highest test weight with 46.4 pounds per bushel. The
yield and test weight data for barley performance in the Piedmont are
averages of Stanly, Rowan and Chatham Counties.
In the Coastal Plain Area, Table 6 shows the difference in yield
between varieties and breeding lines. The mean of the test in bushels per
acre was 63.5 for the average of three locations in the Coastal Plain.
acre. The test weight in pounds per bushel on the eight entri~svaried from 45.2 to 47.8 with a mean of 46.5. The mean test weight for 1979-80 season
was 4.9 pounds more than last season's test weight. The variety, Keowee,
and the experimental, NC 75-75, showed the highest test weight at 47.8.
Oats
The data from the oat trials in North Carolina are recorded in Tables
7 and 8.
Entries in the Piedmont oat test were lower in 1980 compared with
1979. The mean yield of the test was 79.2 bushels for three locations with
a decrease of 30.6 bushels under last year.
The highest in yield was the experimental, Coker 76-30, with 90.3
bushels per acre and Brooks was second at 90.0 bushels per acre. The
experimental, Coker 76-30, also had the highest test weight with 36.2
pounds per bushel.
In the Coastal Plain the mean yield of the test was 84.9 bushels for
three locations. This was .4 bushel less than last year. The mean test
weight was 36.2 pounds per bushel which was 3.5 pounds per bushel more than
1979. The experimental, Coker 76-30, was on top at 96.4 bushels per acre,
and also had the highest test weight at 37.9 pounds per bushel. These
combined data were from tests in Wayne, Washington and Perquimans Counties.
~fueat
Table 9 shows the data on wheat trials in the Piedmont. The mean yield
(bu/A) of the test for the 1980 season was 12.6 bushels less than in 1979.
The mean test weight in pounds per bushel for 1980 was 59.4 compared with
55.6 least year. The highest yielding entry was the experimental,
13
Southern Bell with 61.8 pounds per bushel. In the five-year average,
McNair 1003 was high with 54.3 bushels per acre.
The wheat yields in the Coastal Plain Area were down compared to last
year. The mean of the test decreased from 45.6 bushels per acre as the
mean of 1979 to 43.2 bushels per acre for the 1980 mean. This was a 2.4
bushel per acre decrease.
For the five-year average, the variety, McNair 1003, was the highest
yielding entry at 55.4.
Lodging data are given in Table 11. A one-year, two-year, three-year
and four-year comparison is shown.
Wheat and Flour Analyses
Coded samples of wheat from the 1978-79 Official Variety Test location
in Wayne County were submitted to Statesville Flour Mills in Statesville.
The results of wheat and flour analyses are given in Table 12. Experimental
lines are noted by an asterisk (*). Special acknowledgment is due
Mildew rust Scald Lodging Test Length
resist- resist- resist- resist- hardi- Maturity Weight of
Variety ance ance ance ance ness lb/bu awns
Boone Fair Good Fair Good Good Early High Short
Clayton Good Excellent Fair Good Good Early Medium Awnless
Keowee Good Poor Fair Good Good Early High Short
Maury Good Medium Good Good Good Early High Awnless
I-' .po
Table 3. Characteristics of oat varieties*
rust Smut Mosaic Winter Lodging Test
resist- resist- resist- Maturity Hardi- -resist- Weight
Variety ance ance ance ness ance lb/bu
-Carolee Fair Good Fair Medium Fair Good Medium
Coker 227 Excellent Good Good Med. Early Good Good Med. High
Salem Fair Good Good Medium Fair Excellent High
Brooks Fair Good Good Early Good Excellent Med. High
Coker 716 Fair Good Good Medium Good Excellent Med. High
Table 4. Characteristics of wheat varieties*
Leaf Soft
rust Mildew Mosaic Winter Lodging Height Test Wheat
resist- resist- resist- Maturity Hardi- resist- of Weigh t Milling
Variety ance ance ance ance Straw lb/bu Quality
Abe** Good Good Good Medium Excellent Good Medium High Good
Arthur 71** Good Good Good Medium Excellent Good Semi-Dwarf High Good
Coker 747 Good Good Good Medium Good Good Semi-Dwarf High Good
Coker 762 Excellent Good Good Medium Fair Fair Semi-Dwarf Hedium Good
Delta Queen Good Good Good Medium Good Good Semi-Dwarf High Good
I-J lJ1
Hart Good Good Good Medium Good Good Medium High Fair
Omega 78 Good Good Good Medium Fair Fair Medium High Fair
Pioneer Brand S76 Fair Poor Excellent Medium Good Excellent Medium High Poor
Pioneer Brand S78 Fair Poor Excellent Medium Good Excellent Medium High Poor
McNair 1003 Fair Good Good Medium Excellent Excellent Medium Medium Good
Roy Good Fair Good Medium Good Excellent Semi-Dwarf Medium Good
Southern Bell Good Fair Good Early Fair Excellent Semi-Dwarf High Fair
*These characte~isticsbased upon all availab~e obse~atio~s.
Table 5. Summary of BAP~EY performance trials in the Piedmont.
Variety or Line
1 yr. avg.1.1
1980
bu/A 1bs/bu
2 yr. avg. 1979-1980
bu/A 1bs/bu
3 yr. avg ,
1978-1980
bu/A 1bs/bu
4 yr. avg ,
1977-1980
bul A 1bs/bu
5 yr. avg.
1976-1980
bu/A 1bs/bu
Clayton 68.3 43.6 63.9 42.8 65.2 43.6 56.8 42.9 61.4 43.3
Boone 79.8 46.0 79.7 45.4 77.7 45.8 66.4 44.8 71.0 45.2
Keowee 70.4 46.9 72.1 46.4 71.1 47.1 62.5 46.3 67.9 46.4
Maury 51.3 42.6 57.6 42.7 58.7 43.2 53.2 42.8 61.4 43.5
*NC 75-75 79.3 47.0 81.6 47.0 77.3 47.3
*NC 75-140 73.8 43.0 69.5 43.6 69.2 43.8
*NC 76-19 68.8 43.3 66.7 43.4
*NC 76-20 65.8 43.4 66.1 43.6
Mean of Test 69.7 44.5 69.6 44.4 69.9 45.1 60.2 44.2 65.4 44.6
L.S.D. (.05) 15.2
( .01) 21.2
C.V. ( % ) 11
l/Average of Stanly, Rowan and Chatham Counties. * Experimenta1s.
Table 6. Summary of BARLEY performance trials in the Coastal Plain.
1 yr. avg.!/ 2 yr. avg , 3 yr. avg , 4 yr. avg. 5 yr. avg.
Variety 1980 1979-1980 1978-1980 1977-1980 1976-1980
or Line bu/A 1bs/bu bu/A 1bs/bu bu/A 1bs/bu bu/A 1bs/bu bu/A 1bs/bu
Clayton 65.2 45.8 62.4 43.0 66.8 43.7 64.7 43.7 64.3 43.5
Boone 66.4 47.0 68.0 45.0 71.4 46.0 69.9 45.8 71.8 45.5
Keowee 65.3 47.8 66.7 47.4 71.7 47.3 68.2 47.0 66.9 46.5
Maury 52.3 45.2 53.0 42.4 53.4 43.0 54.2 43.4
*NC 75-75 67.8 47.8 66.0 45.5 63.9 46.1
*NC 75-140 67.5 46.2 60.5 43.1 66.9 43.5
*NC 76-19 61.4 46.2 59.4 43.6
*NC 76-20 62.0 45.9 58.6 43.1
Mean of Test 63.5 46.5 61.8 44.1 65.7 44.9 64.2 45.0 67.7 45.2
L.S.D. ( .05) 11.0
( .01) 15.3
c.v.
( % ) 13Table 7.
17
Summary of OAT performance trials in the Piedmont.
Variety or Line
1 yr. avg.
1
..11980
bu/A 1bs/bu
2 yr. avg. 1979-1980
bu/A 1bs/bu
3 yr. avg. 1978-1980
bulA 1bs/bu
4yr. avg.
1977-1980
bu/A 1bs/bu
5 yr. avg. 1976-1980
bulA 1bs/bu
Caro1ee 72.6 32.7 92.3 33.8 91.8 33.7 94.5 34.4 102.1 34.2
Salem 70.6 35.7 90.0 35.4 89.9 34.9 95.0 35.4 106.1 35.5
Coker 227 83.5 34.4 101.6 34'.8 98.5 34.3 103.4 34.8 109.5 34.9
Brooks 90.0 34.0 102.8 34.0 100.5 33.6
Coker 716 81.7 35.4 103.4 35.4 103.0 34.8
*NC 75-2 68.5 33.5 87.4 33.8
*NC 75-6 76.2 33.1 92.4 33.0
*Coker 76-30 90.3 36.2
Mean of Test 79.2 34.4 95.7 34.3 96.7 34.3 97.6 34.9 105.9 34.9
-L.S.D. (.05) 11.0
( .01) 15.3
C.V. ( % ) 10
l/Average of Stanly, Rowan and Chatham Counties. * Experimenta1s.
Table 8. Summary of OAT performance trials in the Coastal Plain.
Variety or Line
1 yr. avg.1..1
1980
bulA 1bs/bu
2 yr. avg. 1979-1980
bul A 1bs/bu
3 yr. avg , 1978-1980
bu/A 1bs/bu
4 yr. avg. 1977-1980
bu/A 1bs/bu
5 yr. avg. 1976-1980
bulA 1bs/bu
Caro1ee 86.5 34.6 87.8 33.0 96.9 32.9 97.0 33.0 94.0 33.2
Salem 84.8 37.6 90.3 36.0 101.4 36.0 101.9 35.8 97.5 35.5
Coker 227 85.6 36.7 87.2 35.8 102.2 35.1 97.9 35.0 96.3 34.7
Brooks 89.1 35.0 92.4 33.4 103.1 33.2 101.8 33.7
Coker 716 91.2 36.3 89.5 34.6 103.1 34.2 101.8 34.5
*NC 75-2 71.3 36.0 71.3 34.3
*NC 75-6 74.2 35.4 74.1 33.6
*Coker 76-30 96.4 37.9
Mean of Test 84.9 36.2 84.6 34.4 101.3 34.3 100.1 34.4 95.9 34.5
L.S.D. ( .05) 7.2
(.01) 10.0
C.V. ( % ) 8
18
Table 9. Summary of WHEAT performance trials in the Piedmont.
1 yr. avg.11 2 yr. avg , 3 yr. avg. 4 yr. avg. 5 yr. avg ,
Variety 1980 1979-1980 1978-1980 1977-1980 1976-1980
or Line bu/A 1bs/bu bu/A 1bs/bu bu/A 1bs/bu bu/A 1bs/bu bu/A 1bs/bu
Arthur 71 36.4 60.7 45.9 58.0 42.9 58.8 42.4 58.4 41.8 58.7
Abe 38.2 60.3 47.6 58.2 45.5 58.8 44.6 58.2 42.7 58.3
Coker 747 47.9 61.1 53.6 59.2 51.4 59.9 50.0 59.2 51.4 59.7
McNair 1003 47.2 58.3 56.9 57.2 53.8 57.6 52.9 56.6 54.3 57.3
Roy 51.3 57.6 53.2 56.4 53.8 57.4 52.5 56.6
*NC 74-31 50.8 57.5 54.1 56.6 54.4 57.4 52.6 56.5
Coker 762 45.8 57.0 50.5 56.8 51.6 57.5
Delta Queen 36.5 59.3 43.4 57.8 44.1 58.6
Pioneer Brand S76 39.8 60.5 49.0 58.4 46.7 59.0
Pioneer Brand S78 42.1 60.6 49.0 57.7 47.6 58.6
*Va. 75-24-95 53.4 58.9 58.3 57.6
Hart 41.0 60.8
Omega 78 40.5 60.1
Southern Bell 49.2 61.8
*Coker 79-20 40.8 60.0
*Va. 76-54-67 45.0 60.9
*NC 76-104 40.5 56.1
*NC 76-148 47.8 58.4
Mean of Test 44.1 59.4 51.0 57.6 49.2 58.4 49.2 57.6 47.6 58.5
-L.S.D. (.05) 7.2
(.01) 9.6
C.V. ( % ) 8
l/Average of Stanly, Rowan and Chatham Counties. * Experimenta1s.
Table 10. Summary of WHEAT performance trials in the Coastal Plain.
1 yr. avg.
l l
2 yr. avg. 3 yr. avg . 4 yr. avg . 5 yr. avg.Variety 1980 1979-1980 1978-1980 1977-1980 1976-1980
or Line bu/A 1bs/bu bu/A 1bs/bu bu/a 1bs/bu bu/A 1bs/bu bu/A 1bs/bu
Arthur 71 40.3 60.5 41.2 58.3 45.0 59.0 45.1 58.8 41.9 58.9
Abe 42.8 60.4 45.1 58.0 47.1 58.4 48.0 58.6 43.9 58.4
Coker 747 49.7 61.1 49.6 58.4 55.4 58.9 56.4 59.2 54.0 59.6
McNair 1003 50.3 58.4 51.9 56.7 57.3 56.1 57.8 56.6 55.4 57.0
Roy 43.7 56.6 45.7 55.0 54.8 55.5 57.8 56.2
*NC 74-31 40.5 54.5 42.5 53.4 50.3 53.9 54.4 55.0
Coker 762 51.0 56.7 48.0 55.0 57.0 55.6
Delta Queen 41.8 58.6 43.0 56.8 48.8 57.3
Pioneer Brand S76 40.6 60.2 44.5 58.3 48.8 58.2
Pioneer Brand S78 37.2 60.2 42.2 58.0 48.1 58.1
*Va. 75-24-95 48.0 59.3 51.5 57.7
Hart 37.5 59.6
Omega 78 42.6 58.9
Southern Bell 48.3 61.8
*Coker 79-20 44.6 60.6
*Va. 76-54-67 46.6 60.7
*NC 76-104 31.5 56.4
*NC 76-148 41.2 58.6
Mean~ Test 43.2 59.1 45.9 56.9 51.3 57.1 53.2 57.4 48.8 58.5
L.S.D. (.05) 7.4
(.01) 10.0
C.V. ( % ) 8
19
Table 11. Lodging Data (Percent). Varieties
1 yr. avg.1:./
or Lines 2 yr. avg , 3 yr. avg. 4 yr. avg. BARLEY
Boone 65 67 57 59 Clayton 46 68 54 51 Keowee 32 47 39 36 Maury 25 36 29 25 *NC 75-75 27 40 38
*NC 75-140 34 36 26 *NC 76-19 66 78
*NC 76-20 69 79 OATS
Caro1ee 49 48 38 48 Salem 24 33 23 21 Coker 227 51 56 41 49 Brooks 45 54 36 42 Coker 716 38 51 36 40 *NC 75-2 25 52
*NC 75-6 34 54 *Coker 76-30 37
WHEAT
McNair 1003 1 12 8 11 Coker 747 6 29 19 20 Arthur 71 4 12 8 14 Abe 4 15 10 14 Roy 1 12 8 10 *NC 74-31 0 22 14 19
Coker 762 14 34 23 Pioneer brand 76 0 6
Pioneer brand 78 1 12 Delta Queen 19 37 *Va. 75-24-95 1 12
Hart 1 Omega 78 1 Southern Bell 0 *Coker 79-20 36 *Va. 76-54-67 5 *NC 76-104 0 *NC 76-148 2
1/A f · locations.
- verage 0 SlX
Wayne County
Wheat Analysis Flour Analysis
%
Variety Test % % Flour % %
or Line Weight Moisture Protein Yield Moisture Ash Protein Abs Mix MTl To1.
Roy 59.5 13.9 11.35 70.2 13.1 .467 10.52 49.2 1 3/4 130 1 3/4
Titan 59.5 13.9 11.10 67.3 13.8 .424 9.68
Pioneer Brand 876 63.0 13.5 13.00 68.3 13.4 .468 10.90 53.7 3 3/4 120 4 3/4 N
Pioneer Brand 878 62.0 13.8 12.70 67.6 13.3 .475 11.22 53.0 3 1/4 100 4 1/4 0
McNair 1003 63.0 13.5 11.55 67.3 13.3 .428 10.18 49.9 2 100 1 3/4
Delta Queen 61.5 13.6 11.50 69.3 13.3 .440 10.30 52.2 3 1/2 80 4
Coker 747 62.5 13.9 12.65 70.9 12.8 .438 11.43 51.3 3 130 3
Arthur 71 62.0 13.8 12.40 69.9 13.2 .422 10.94 51.4 2 1/2 100 2 1/2
Abe 62.5 13.6 12.65 70.9 13.0 .448 11.02 49.3 3 1/4 90 3 3/4
Oasis 62.0 13.7 13.75 69.9 13.2 .435 11.50 51.7 3 1/2 80 2 1/4
Downy 62.5 13.6 12.45 70.5 12.7 .505 11.01 51.4 4 90 2 3/4
~. C. 74-31 59.0 13.3 11.95 70.2 12.8 .446 10.27 49.6 2 3/4 110 2 1/4
*N. C. 75-45 60.5 13.6 12.75 70.0 12.8 .431 11.32 50.6 2 1/2 120 1 9/10
*N. K. 74W520 60.0 13.5 11.40 72.7 13.3 .420 10.60 57.3 3 1/4 70 4 1/2
*N. K. 75W812 58.0 13.2 12.15 68.6 12.3 .530 11.84 34.7 3 60 1 3/4
*va. 75-54-53 62.5 13.5 11.60 71.2 13.2 .400 10.74 49.8 3 1/4 100 5
*va. 75-24-95 62.0 13.9 11.55 70.3 13.3 .448 10.34 51.8 3 1/2 100 4 1/2
